Thread: Chubby Monitors

Originally Posted by Blade Wielder

Wait a minute: since when does the American government foot the bill for the health care of its civilians?

If you guys do end up switching to the "Red Dawn" health care system that Canada has, maybe then there'd be a reason for the government to introduce the Fatty McFatFat device. You're working yourself up for nothing.

Really, I'm not worked up at all. When I saw this device presented on the news I thought it would make for some good conversation. Especially in light of the pending health care legislation.

Originally Posted by commiecat

Wait, what? Did you just quote Obama quoting a famous line and then use that to conclude that he's bringing us closer to Nineteen Eighty-Four?

Wait, what? Did you just suggest that Obama has invented time travel?

Originally Posted by honedright

Wait, what? Did you just suggest that Obama has invented time travel?

Indeed. Obama had a secret meeting with Al Gore who then harnessed the power of the entire Internet to go back in time in an effort to get Mondale to carry more than one state.

Originally Posted by commiecat

Indeed. Obama had a secret meeting with Al Gore who then harnessed the power of the entire Internet to go back in time in an effort to get Mondale to carry more than one state.

Back to 1984 eh? That means Regan is back in the White House...

Sounds good to me!

Originally Posted by Blade Wielder

Wait a minute: since when does the American government foot the bill for the health care of its civilians?

Federal and state governments account for about 40% of civilian healthcare spending in the U.S. now through Medicare and Medicaid-ish programs.

I'm in favor of some level of enforced disease management. When I say enforced, I mean if you have been identified by your physician or by a history of ongoing hospital admissions because of flagrant failure to follow treatment plans, then you should have to pay more out of pocket. If you are going to take from the pool of an insurance product, you have some level of respinsibility to make reasonable efforts to minimize the costs you incure. You would still have the freedom to live your life the way you want to, but you would bear the higher costs of poor health decisions.

Monitering devices are now being used in the homes of people with chronic conditions and they allow providers to check more frequently on the patient's condition without causing the frail and sick to leave their homes as often. As long as a health care provider is reading the results of such devices, I don't think their is much risk of the Big Brother thing.

Jordan

Many Federal Law Enforcement agencies monitor their field people's weight and fitness and they have to pass a fitness test each year. If they don't they are given some time to comply and then are terminated.

So you can get a letter in the mail asking you to report to a facility for a fitness-health evaluation the same way you have to renew your drivers license. Electronic monitering is unnecessary.

Originally Posted by jnich67

If you are going to take from the pool of an insurance product, you have some level of respinsibility to make reasonable efforts to minimize the costs you incure. You would still have the freedom to live your life the way you want to, but you would bear the higher costs of poor health decisions.

Under a national health program, wouldn't we all be part of that pool? Therefore we would all be held responsible. But not to ourselves, to others managing our health care.

In your scenario poor health decisions (by whose definition BTW?) would be penalized.

Originally Posted by honedright

Under a national health program, wouldn't we all be part of that pool? Therefore we would all be held responsible. But not to ourselves, to others managing our health care.

In your scenario poor health decisions (by whose definition BTW?) would be penalized.

Yes, we would all be part of that pool. I can't think of another way to make it work, because those who initially didn't want to be part of the pool, would probably join once they got sick and would never have contributed.

Correct, we would not be responsible to ourselves, because we are using other's money to pay for our care. If we wanted to be responsible to ourselves we would pay for our care out of our own pocket. If we got sick, we would forgoe modern care that we couldn't afford and go off and die.

There is obviously a line here and I'm not talking about applying these arrangements to everyone's health. There are already clearly identified conditions that can be managed (eg. diabetes, COPD, asthma, etc). If managed, costs can be reasonably contained and the quality of life improved. If they go unmanaged, frequent ER visits and hospital admissions can use up the premiums paid by a dozen or more people each year - easily. These types of conditions are really what eat up the dollars. The health plan (government paid or otherwise) can identify such patients through claims history and offer them a management program where they say to the person's doctor "hey, how do we keep this person out of the hospital"? The protocols are well established and evidence based. A case manager (RN) can coordinate treatments that are part of the program designed by the doctor and be pro-active in seeing they are followed through. If the person doesn't want to go along, and refuses to even try, then yes, they should have to cough up extra bucks and be penalized.

I don't know about the rest of you, but the cost of my employer sponsored insurance is really starting to hurt, and my benefits are being reduced at the same time. I have no real choice in plans either. The plan is decided on by my employer. In five years, if things continue, I don't know if I'll be able to afford insurance without sacrificing other basic things - and I'm solidly middle class. I can't imagine how those making less get by - especially those having to buy individual plans. What is a solution without massive government involvement? Other than private pay, I haven't heard one.

Jordan

Originally Posted by jnich67

If we got sick, we would forgoe modern care that we couldn't afford and go off and die.

Why is this always the assumption? We don't all just die when we get sick. In fact people who die from severe illness have often done so under the best modern care. And many illnesses resolve back to health with or without medical care.

Originally Posted by honedright

Why is this always the assumption? We don't all just die when we get sick. In fact people who die from severe illness have often done so under the best modern care. And many illnesses resolve back to health with or without medical care.

Would you consider that health insurance has become a type of crutch to assuage the fear of dying? Maybe even a type of addiction?

Huh?

If you had to have Open Heart Surgery like I did 12 years ago to correct a congenital defect and you had no health insurance and you got a bill in the mail for around 125K in present numbers probably way over 200K how would you feel about health insurance then? Happily I have good health insurance.